September 19, 2022 An online artist claimed last week that AI image generators are being haunted by a woman named “Loab.” She haunts every image that she touches. Google her, if you dare! It's Monday. Let's jump in.
THE BIG IDEA Music is the Loser in the Quest for ‘Innovation’Innovation is much sought after in music – by musicians, often, by the federal government, increasingly. But could the pursuit of the slightly nebulous-sounding “innovation” be driving music in the wrong direction? The history of Western classical music focuses on the originality of music. It singles out the great masters – Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, Debussy, Schoenberg, Webern, Stravinsky, Messiaen and Cage – as exceptional. It unfolds a rich narrative that points to the innovative nature of the masterworks. Innovation is understood as breaking new ground; it gives music new styles and genres, and ushers in the Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods. The 20th century gives birth to new tonal and rhythmic languages. Schoenberg (1874-1951) suspended the tonal system with his 12-note music (serialism), and Stravinsky (1882-1971) challenged the tyranny of the bar line, “by introducing irregular accents, syncopation and frequent changes of meter”. rested in exploring the full potential of sound and noise, and 20th-century classical music is characterised by dynamic invention and innovation. Two streamsTwo major streams are apparent in the 20th century: serialism (12-note music) followed by, and overlapping with, reactionary minimalism (with its repetitive rhythmic patterns and return to the simplicity of tonality). Minimalism (re)ushers in the major triad (a three-note chord) and revels in its simplicity as a counterfoil to serialism’s complexity. Minimalism invents new ways to energise music. Repetitive rhythmic patterns are put to work on small motivic (fragments of melody) structures. The ethos of postmodernism (which rejects the idea of a singular history of music in favour of its diversity and multiple perspectives) then gives birth to a melting pot of styles, genres and sub-genres. The pluralism of postmodernism makes music dizzy with labels – post-minimalism, post-serialism, post-style, new spirituality, etc. – and blurs boundaries between highbrow and lowbrow music. But, how much of the music composed in the 21st century would we really call innovative? High stakesComposers and new music groups make innovation their raison d’être. Their marketing paraphernalia is replete with language suggesting excellence and innovation. The publicity material of the well-known Sydney-based Ensemble Offspring informs us the ensemble is “dedicated to the performance of innovative new music” and “pursues an agenda of directly shaping the music of our future”. New York’s Bang on a Can similarly advertises itself as “dedicated to innovative music, wherever it is found,” while building “a world in which powerful new musical ideas flow freely across all genres and borders”. These groups may indeed be performing the most innovative composers. But what is also emerging is a much more heightened gravitational pull of music to money. This has meant that for composers to survive they’ve become much more fiercely competitive. They woo contemporary performing ensembles, hoping for commissions. And they spend excessive amounts of time filling out funding applications and writing up reports at the conclusion of projects, no doubt explaining they were successful in the innovative stakes. Two kinds of composersFunding bodies, such as the Australia Council, emphasize the importance of creativity as an: increasingly strategic value to nations such as Australia in making the transition to innovation and knowledge-based economies. The pursuit of innovation by the federal government puts pressure on the arts community to deliver it. Yet, it takes time, as the history of music shows us, for innovation to be delivered to music. It is impossible for composers to maintain a steady output of truly innovative work. Innovation cannot be manufactured. Furthermore, the phenomenon of the “superstar composer” makes it difficult for the majority of composers to make a living as freelancers. The “superstar effect,” as coined by the late American economist Sherwin Rosen, means relatively small numbers of people dominate the activities in which they engage. For the few, “success breeds success”. For the majority, “the poor get poorer”. There are arguably two kinds of composers. One is the superstar; the other subscribes to an “art-for-art-sake” manifesto. The superstar makes a relatively comfortable living on the proceeds of commissions, royalties and sales of his/her music through commercial outlets. This kind of composer aims to please the audience by pandering to popular taste. The other kind of composer does not care what the masses think. He/she composes for a select group of aficionados and is in constant pursuit of the innovative. But it seems that even the composer who does not care what the masses think has exhausted the repertoire of possibility for the new. This is due, in part, to the heightened relationship of music with money and to the intensified competition this sets up among individuals. It seems that nowadays so-called “innovative” composers are searching for ways to out-innovate their competition. In so doing, they are all doing much the same thing. They tweak an already discovered sound to make it seem new, redefine music as noise, and discover a new genre or style within an existing genre or style. In reality, the so-called new sub-genre or style resembles what they were trying to break out of. They experiment with extending the capabilities of instruments and manipulating sounds in general but end up reproducing the known and familiar. We have a problemThe experimental, pioneering new music composer has not really explored a different model of authorship. Sure, most people collaborate these days. But the division of labour is clearly defined, ultimately reflecting the contribution of each individual. Not everyone can be a superstar. And very few can truly innovate, breaking new ground. So why not experiment with shifting the idea of composer into communities and collaborative spaces that aim to blur the boundaries between one composer and another? De-emphasizing innovation as an individual pursuit and accentuating collective, co-compositional engagements with music could mean that music once again becomes truly innovative. THE LATEST Endings: The Phantom of the Opera, Broadway's longest-running show calls it a day. Superabundance: According to a new book, more people means more innovation, not just more consumption. Exclusive: “I’m just a person who makes music, and I’m not much of a person at all.” Van Cliburn winner Yun-chan Lim tells all in a rare interview. Swan Song: Lars Vogt’s final album will be released by Pentatone next week. Meet James O'Donnell, the man behind the music at the Queen's funeral. Opera Moves: Sondra Radvanovsky to lead Metropolitan Opera’s ‘Medea’. How Queen Elizabeth II inspired Britten to start composing again after he almost died. Tributes: Conductor Klaus Weise has died at age 86. TV: Creators of the hit show, The Great British Bake Off are working on a show that seeks an undiscovered pianist and ends with a concert debut. CHART [Date: Cliburn News: August 2022] 2022 Van Cliburn Competition tops Youtube ChartsFor anyone that thinks a classical music competition is small potatoes, you obviously haven’t been following the Van Cliburn International Piano Competition lately. The competition has just released the viewership results across various digital media channels between June 2–18, 2022 and the results are nothing less than astonishing. By the numbersDigital
Social media
The biggest hit was the Youtube video of Yunchan Lim: Rachmaninov Piano Concerto No. 3 (with Marin Alsop and the Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra). The video trended in the top 24 videos globally with over 7M views. Cliburn’s Youtube channel quintupled to 100K subscribers. Why it mattersUsing Yunchan’s Rach 3 video for comparison, these numbers put the Van Cliburn competition viewership well above some of the biggest television show premieres in history.
To name a few… P.S.The numbers suggest mainstream-level popularity. Why is no one is talking about this? IDEAS Where music innovation comes fromThe role of gatekeepers in music has been shifting significantly to algorithms on platforms such as Youtube, Spotify, and TikTok. This has resulted in lower barriers to entry for musicians, it has also made it harder for new innovative musicians to break through. This is due to the effect that only the most mass appealing music tends to be promoted on the social media feed, which results in a kind of echo chamber for the music people hear most. The concern is that mainstream music is damaging to creativity, especially considering how many important musicians come from artists outside of the norm.
AROUND THE WEB 📅 On this day: 1908 Gustav Mahler's 7th Symphony premieres in Prague 🐒 That’s interesting: Chimps in Uganda have their own signature rhythms when drumming on trees. 📺 Reaction: Vocal Coach/Opera Singer gives her reaction and analysis after hearing Luciano Pavarotti sing "Nessun Dorma". 👂 Must Listen: English National Opera has just performed one of the most moving renditions of God Save the King we have heard yet. Listen here. 👃Audiophile: Byredo is teaming up with Ojas to create a new sensory experience: a fragrance diffuser for audiophiles 🐶 Aww: This new puppy needs a name. Can you help? MEME OF THE WEEK
“Hey any ideas for what we should use for the background to make it look classy AF.” “...Anything is fine. It’s not like anyone is going to look at it that closely.” (Source: @ThreatNotation) How did you like today's email? |